Best survival knife?

I'm not going to get into semantics, since it's already been dealt with more than enough already in this thread.

What I understand it to be you're looking for is an all-round "goin' campin'" kind of knife. Being Swedish I admit to be a little biased towards the Fällkniven knives, considering Lars Fält was involved in designing the knife and he's just as bad ass as they come. However, I'd go for the F1 instead of the A1.

I have a couple of ESEEs myself, a 3 and a 4 which are a nice couple of knives. The Beckers and the Bark Rivers look good too.

In addition to that I always bring a Mora knife or some of my other Puukko style knives.

I hope you found this helpful.
 
Raymond1000 said:
I like Kephart. I like Nessmuk. But they were writing about recreational camping late in the nineteenth century. That has little to do with the life of a voyageur for the fur trade. They weren’t describing wilderness life in the ante-bellum south. Neither of them argued that big knives were not in use. Indeed, Sears spent some ink bad mouthing them.

A WORD AS TO KNIFE, OR KNIVES. THESE ARE OF PRIME NECESSITY AND SHOULD BE OF THE BEST, BOTH AS TO SHAPE AND TEMPER. THE "BOWIES" AND "HUNTING KNIVES" USUALLY KEPT ON SALE, ARE THICK, CLUMSY AFFAIRS, WITH A SORT OF RIDGE ALONG THE MIDDLE OF THE BLADE, MURDEROUS-LOOKING, BUT OF LITTLE USE; RATHER FITTED TO ADORN A DIME NOVEL OR THE BELT OF "BILLY THE KID," THAN THE OUTFIT OF THE HUNTER.

Nessmuk was pushing his double bit hatchet as the essential chopping tool. There’s nothing wrong with that. When I was knee high to a grasshopper I worked with his system. Back then lots of guys carried a hunting knife and a hatchet on their belt. I still have a nice little double bit hatchet, much like his, that I used in camping and hunting.

Eventually I decided a trail knife was less dangerous than a hatchet. My lifelong ambition is to be buried with all my original equipment still intact. So no hatchet. No boys axe. No Hudson Bay axe. For me it’s been long knife, short knife and—in the right circumstances—full size axe ever since.
Click to expand...

Nessmuk wrote about those knives sure but he also wasn't in the fur trapping scene like you say. He probably ran into these knives while being carried by other recreational campers rather then a working crew. If he saw working crews, my bet is that they used axes. Also, I doubt there were many bowies pre-1800 floating around in the west but maybe there were. I was mainly referring to the idea that the green river style butcher knives that were popular back then were used in a way someone would use a busse today. They were not a bowie or a hudson bay. They were thin for butchering and although serviceable as a "survival" knife they are not right for the type of "survival" people do today. The people that carried these generally had an axe for the rough work.
 
Last edited:
Shotgun said:
Nessmuk wrote about those knives sure but he also wasn't in the fur trapping scene like you say. He probably ran into these knives while being carried by other recreational campers rather then a working crew. If he saw working crews, my bet is that they used axes. Also, I doubt there were many bowies pre-1800 floating around in the west but maybe there were. I was mainly referring to the idea that the green river style butcher knives that were popular back then were used in a way someone would use a busse today. They were not a bowie or a hudson bay. They were thin for butchering and although serviceable as a "survival" knife they are not right for the type of "survival" people do today. The people that carried these generally had an axe for the rough work.
Click to expand...

Were there Bowies pre-1800? Of course not. The eponymous knife only took the Bowie name after the Sandbar fight in 1827. For a while there was no clear idea of what a Bowie knife looked like. Cutlers called any big knife a Bowie. Sheffield factories mass produced Bowies for the American trade.

Were there knives of the general Bowie type before 1800? Sure.

The Scandinavian Leuku is a camp knife. The leuku tends to be a thin knife, similar to the Green River.

Shorter versions of the Saxon seax were functionally trail knives.

The fascine knife was a military tool/sidearm from the seventeenth to the nineteenth centuries. It was designed for cutting brush.

The Hudson Bay company produced the first knife actually called a Camp Knife.

You’re right, Green River knives saw plenty of service in the west. The tended to be shipped as a naked blade. Whoever bought one fitted a handle to suit his taste. I don’t think they dominated the Rendezvous as much as Bladeforums legend has it. Over the years I’ve seen enough pictures and read enough descriptions of mountain men with Bowies.

If you’re at your cabin, or making a cabin, you certainly want an axe. If you are scouting good trapping streams, without a pack horse, you’ll probably want a light chopper. That boils down to hatchet, tomahawk, or trail knife.

As for working crews, take a look at this: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B02101yuG3rYZjY2MmQxYWUtMDIxOS00NGM2LTgxNzctOGQzYTFkNTJmMTAy/edit?hl=en&pli=1

Woodsmanship describes the tools of working loggers in 1945. That was the waning days of old fashioned logging, using saws and axes and peaveys. In the section called Brushing you’ll find a description of the trail knife.
 
Last edited:
marcinek said:
I look forward to seeing the results of your research. I certainly hope you base your research on using the knife yourself in the field. Also, including Bear Grylls' "review" of the knife he is selling in your review isn't a good thing. Bear's review is not a review...it is a marketing piece. A commercial.
Click to expand...

I will change the title right now into "Bear Grylls commercial". Thank you!
 
Nobody mentioned clearly that you carry the thing. Somebody take 5,6,7...10 blade to look like real tough man "Rambo" but it 2-3 lb instead of 1/2 lb. You will not be naked. except of knife, you need water, at least some food, tent or waterproof peace of coat ets.ets. if you do not come to place on your car with ton of luggage and just buttoning for fun pretending you "survive". if you will go even 3 day trip with survival equipment I think you will fell in love with something like Mora or F1.

I do not understand why you guys are you cutting logs or making shelter with knife, if mankind create the axe at least 10,000 years ago if not earlier. the combination small axe + good pocket knife ( like paramilitary) or small/medium fixed blade - Mora, BKR necker, esee izula) probably work the best
I also think that every sharp you use for survival should survive throwing, at least it means that it does not brake if you drop it accidently.
 
The stock answer is always, "the one you have on you". But if I'm ever in a survival situation, in the woods most likely, I hope I have my Survive! GSO-5 on me.
 
It might be important to consider that the large knives carried by the mountain men of the 1800's were carried as weapons for close quarter self defense, along with a 'hawk. Today we have a thing called a Glock for such purposes....

I used to carry big knives. But as I spent more and more time in the woods (I actually live in the woods now), my knives got smaller and smaller. The largest knife that I would even consider carrying now would be an Esee 5 or a TOPS BOB, and I am likely to go with something smaller yet - A Bark River Bravo 1 or a TOPS Dragonfly 4.5, along with a small but solid folder (an Esee Zancudo is probably the best knife for the money available today IMO). Many times, it's just an Izula II around my neck and a folder and I'm GTG. I have also learned the value of a saw - it is a much safer, faster and more efficient way of building shelter and processing fire wood.

As previously stated, skills are more important than stuff. Even though I am now 53 years old, ( and pretty much falling apart) I am more competent to "survive" in the woods with a Mora now than I was 30 years ago (as a much stronger, healthier young man with fewer skills) equipped with anything short of a chainsaw.

My advice is to get something strong, but modestly priced like a BK-16, a Mora Clipper or a Zancudo and a Silky folding saw and then learn to use them....

Cody Lundin's book "98.6 Degrees - The Art of Keeping Your Ass Alive" would be an excellent starting place....
 
An interesting counter opinion:

www.m4040.com/Survival/Survival.htm



“Bush” Blades... Function or Fad?

- By M40 – Sept, 2007







I know the term "bush knife" has come to signify a blade about 4-6" in length and about an inch to 2" wide. Many have stag or hardwood handles, and some even sport really beautiful craftsmanship. I'm not sure just how and why these came into fashion or how folks came to think that these had any place in an outdoors environment. The design falls FAR short of what an outdoors blade should be. I've seen pocket knives that sport bigger and more functional blades.



These are skinners maybe, but definitely not choppers (the primary task of an outdoors blade). Oddly enough, there's very little whittling to be done in most wilderness survival situations. If the size and weight of these "bush" knives appeals to you, you really should consider packing a decent folder or a multi-tool instead. A multi-tool has a lot more to offer in the way of tools you can actually use.



Survival shows abound these days, and they have a definite "green" trend going. The hosts carry these small "bush" knives and "tracker" blades because the shows are trying to be politically correct, not because these are the ideal tools. Those big, mean looking blades must frighten the pink-panty wearing crowd among us.



You can learn a lot from history. Look at almost any point in history since the advent of steel, and examine what was carried by those who lived close to nature. The closer they were to the environment, the bigger the blades they carried. Ma Nature provides big, sharp fangs and claws and quite a bit of brute force to her pets, so make sure your "fang" is the sharpest, biggest brute you can comfortably wear and wield.



A true bush blade (as I would make it) is a chopping machine. It's a large bowie or kukri style blade with a weight-forward balance that makes short work of brush and limbs. It's a one-tool carpentry shop that can whip up a shelter on short notice when the weather rolls in. It has the brute chopping power of a hatchet or machete, but the wearability of a hunting knife. Finally, it's got enough length to be shave sharp at the hilt and point, but a belly that is sharpened to a durable chopping edge.



Ideal wilderness blades (and I've examined the blades carried by many a wilderness survival instructor), are long, thick, carbon steel powerhouses that take a scary-sharp edge and then hold it through a mile of trailblazing. They're the kind of blades you can apply your full weight to, and not worry about snapping them. Also, they aren't so costly that you baby them to keep from marring them. They are tools designed to perform brutally hard work... chopping, digging, prying and hammering. In short, don't haul anything into the woods that you don't mind marring the crap out of. Those $500 blades may be pretty, but if you're afraid to actually use them, just leave 'em at home!



I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything, and I'm not criticizing those who've bought "bush" blades. I've been there... in the woods... in a survival setting... with a "survival" knife that turned out to be "not enough blade". At that moment, I sure wished I had a chopper instead. I just want to see folks pack the right gear for the job, and the job is chopping.



I've not only had to live off the land with a blade, but I've spent years practicing the skills needed to do so. I'm now a "basement bladesmith" and have forged and/or stock-removed my share of outdoor blades. I've tested each to see what makes it good and what makes it bad. There's a lot of factors there, but one thing has always held true: A big blade can do anything a little blade can, but the reverse is DEFINITELY not the case.



To sum up, I'd rather see someone tackle the outdoors with a $15 Ontario mil-spec machete than any of those really expensive and pretty "bush" blades."
 
I like a smaller knife paired with an axe. Even a decent SAK will do the job for knife work while the axe or hatchet chops. Start inexpensive and then practice. You'll find what works for you. Keep us posted!

Zieg
 
Gaston444 said:
To sum up, I'd rather see someone tackle the outdoors with a $15 Ontario mil-spec machete than any of those really expensive and pretty "bush" blades."
Click to expand...

It sucks, I've tried. Machetes don't do knife work very well at all, hence why any military issues field knives alongside the machetes.

If you have an axe with you, A large heavy blade is rather cumbersome. If your knife is your only wood preparing tool (not recommended) then maybe you would consider a heavy chopper/basher, otherwise a thinner FFG knife 6" or under should do you fine for any task you want, that's about all the blade you need to baton anything the axe has split. My brother and I both split wood duties between an axe and a knife, his are a Collins DB and a Benchmade 158 CSK II, mine are a Husqvarna multi-purpose and a Gravelle FK5. The last campout we went on together we managed to fell and prepare 3 small trees varying up to 12" in diameter into all the shapes and sizes we needed to start and maintain a fire. Plenty of batoning all around, but the axes did the heavy work. Knives are fine tools, not objects of force.
 
I have a few "Survival" knives from various brands Mora, Benchmade, Bark River, Swamp Rat, Fallkniven, and Survive. I tried them all out and so far my favorite are the Survive series. Between the 3.5, 4.1, and 5.1 the winner for me is the 5.1. That being said I think any of them could be used as a "Survival" knife, but everyone has different preferences. Personally, the Mora's are great for the money, but if I was told to only pick one knife for a survival situation it would be the last on my list. Again, personal preference because I'm sure they will work fine.
 
You'll have to find a knife that suits YOUR needs/skills/habits. Look around the big names and youtube survivalists. The only constant (well, almost) between them is a full tang knife.
Mors said his is the Skookum
Canterbury like his PLSK
Grylls had his Bayley
Lundin likes the Mora
the E2E guy seems fond of the ESEE5 (among many, many other knives)

Obviously theres the Fallknives and Beckers.

My choice is a Junglas (mostly because I do a lot of brush clearing) and a 3-4 inch fixed/folder. Went to that because I just don't like in the 5-9 inch blades


My suggestion is to buy cheap, figure out what you like and don't like about certain kinds of knives and then buy nice.
 
tlisowski said:
Esee knives are by far the best fixed blades. I own the 6,4 and izula
Click to expand...

"Best" is a pretty broad statement...... I've owned some Esees and I like 'em. However, I truly doubt that you'll find an Esee anything that will cut alongside a Bark River in A2 and have anything close to it's cutting power or edge retention.....
 
I'm new to this "survival knife" search and these are the ones that I made a list for, but, I'm still hesitant.

Ontario Pilot survival knife ( on paper it looks too short, useless spine serrations )
Ka-bar Dog head utility knife 1317 ( same as Ka-bar usmc I believe )
Buck Brahma (unsure about the hollow grind )
Ontario M9 bayonet (unsure?)

still looking everyday, and I think about it while trying to sleep, lol...
 
If you have to go with one knife then thereva few good 4-7" options out there, many already listed, but the Best "survival" knife IMHO is a combination of "knives".

1 multitool in the pack
1 good, sharp, durable 3-4" (short) blade on your side (preferably fixed but a good folder will do)
1 "chopper" be it machete, kukri, hatchet, or the likes thereof for on your pack.

Despite gimmicky marketing schemes of these "do it all multi axe-knife-wrench" sets, they really are more gimmick then anything else, and one 4-7" blade will leave you wanting a little more for real deep hard chopping and bushwhacking, and also leave you wanting a bit less for skinning and such.

All 3 have their individual purposes in the wilderness and all will come in handy at different times.
 
Gaston444 said:
An interesting counter opinion:

www.m4040.com/Survival/Survival.htm



“Bush” Blades... Function or Fad?

- By M40 – Sept, 2007







I know the term "bush knife" has come to signify a blade about 4-6" in length and about an inch to 2" wide. Many have stag or hardwood handles, and some even sport really beautiful craftsmanship. I'm not sure just how and why these came into fashion or how folks came to think that these had any place in an outdoors environment. The design falls FAR short of what an outdoors blade should be. I've seen pocket knives that sport bigger and more functional blades.



These are skinners maybe, but definitely not choppers (the primary task of an outdoors blade). Oddly enough, there's very little whittling to be done in most wilderness survival situations. If the size and weight of these "bush" knives appeals to you, you really should consider packing a decent folder or a multi-tool instead. A multi-tool has a lot more to offer in the way of tools you can actually use.



Survival shows abound these days, and they have a definite "green" trend going. The hosts carry these small "bush" knives and "tracker" blades because the shows are trying to be politically correct, not because these are the ideal tools. Those big, mean looking blades must frighten the pink-panty wearing crowd among us.



You can learn a lot from history. Look at almost any point in history since the advent of steel, and examine what was carried by those who lived close to nature. The closer they were to the environment, the bigger the blades they carried. Ma Nature provides big, sharp fangs and claws and quite a bit of brute force to her pets, so make sure your "fang" is the sharpest, biggest brute you can comfortably wear and wield.



A true bush blade (as I would make it) is a chopping machine. It's a large bowie or kukri style blade with a weight-forward balance that makes short work of brush and limbs. It's a one-tool carpentry shop that can whip up a shelter on short notice when the weather rolls in. It has the brute chopping power of a hatchet or machete, but the wearability of a hunting knife. Finally, it's got enough length to be shave sharp at the hilt and point, but a belly that is sharpened to a durable chopping edge.



Ideal wilderness blades (and I've examined the blades carried by many a wilderness survival instructor), are long, thick, carbon steel powerhouses that take a scary-sharp edge and then hold it through a mile of trailblazing. They're the kind of blades you can apply your full weight to, and not worry about snapping them. Also, they aren't so costly that you baby them to keep from marring them. They are tools designed to perform brutally hard work... chopping, digging, prying and hammering. In short, don't haul anything into the woods that you don't mind marring the crap out of. Those $500 blades may be pretty, but if you're afraid to actually use them, just leave 'em at home!



I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything, and I'm not criticizing those who've bought "bush" blades. I've been there... in the woods... in a survival setting... with a "survival" knife that turned out to be "not enough blade". At that moment, I sure wished I had a chopper instead. I just want to see folks pack the right gear for the job, and the job is chopping.



I've not only had to live off the land with a blade, but I've spent years practicing the skills needed to do so. I'm now a "basement bladesmith" and have forged and/or stock-removed my share of outdoor blades. I've tested each to see what makes it good and what makes it bad. There's a lot of factors there, but one thing has always held true: A big blade can do anything a little blade can, but the reverse is DEFINITELY not the case.



To sum up, I'd rather see someone tackle the outdoors with a $15 Ontario mil-spec machete than any of those really expensive and pretty "bush" blades."
Click to expand...
Nah, people carry "bush blades" because they can use axes. Machetes are not as effective in the woods and are made to be so tough they don't take good edges compared to a knife with good steel.

Even without an Axe, I'd rather have a smaller, sharp, unbreakable knife. Then a big dull machete.
 
strategy9 said:
If you have to go with one knife then thereva few good 4-7" options out there, many already listed, but the Best "survival" knife IMHO is a combination of "knives".

1 multitool in the pack
1 good, sharp, durable 3-4" (short) blade on your side (preferably fixed but a good folder will do)
1 "chopper" be it machete, kukri, hatchet, or the likes thereof for on your pack.

Despite gimmicky marketing schemes of these "do it all multi axe-knife-wrench" sets, they really are more gimmick then anything else, and one 4-7" blade will leave you wanting a little more for real deep hard chopping and bushwhacking, and also leave you wanting a bit less for skinning and such.

All 3 have their individual purposes in the wilderness and all will come in handy at different times.
Click to expand...

No saw? Ouch

Sounds like more work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top